Warrenty and modications

[GreenSpring 13]

Hello,

A while ago I posted about my gearbox having issues. I finally got my car into my local stealership (Toyota Fish Bros, Swindon) this morning and I got a phonecall this afternoon telling me they can't cover the gearbox under warrenty because I've made modifications to my exhaust and I don't have a catalic converter. This is nothing to do with the gearbox?! I was told when I bought the car that if the item with the issue was modified then it wouldn't be covered but otherwise it's covered. Am I wrong here?

I'm going in either this evening or tomorrow to chat to them. Must keep my cool

[Dave86 33]

I was under the impression that failure must be attributed to the modification. So an exhaust isn't going to break a gearbox....

 

Sounds like your dealer is trying to wriggle his way out of what sounds like a legitimate claim. If they persist try Toyota GB...my dealer has rolled over a few times when I have called them!

[James18 50]

Was also told the same when I took out an extended warranty when purchasing used from local Toyota dealer a few months back.

Modifications shouldn't affect the validity of your warranty as long as the modified part doesn't have an effect  on the part you are claiming for. As @Dave86 has said, can't see how it could be argued that the exhaust would cause a gearbox issue.

Maybe try a different dealership? 

 

[Deacon 1357]

Maybe show them this, it may help? 

[GreenSpring 13]

Thanks guys, update on this..

 

Spoke to the warrenty person at the dealership and he's claiming that they also can't cover it because it's clearly seen a bit of time on track. I argued that the issue has happened before (they repaired it the first time when the car was stock) and there's clearly an underlying issue causing the gearbox to have more problems of the same nature. I've spoken to Toyota GB and they're going to contact me soon. I really don't want to be out of pocket over a broken synchro when I've done nothing to break it myself! 

 

Absolutely fuming 

[Kodename47 446]

25 minutes ago, GreenSpring said:

Thanks guys, update on this..

Spoke to the warrenty person at the dealership and he's claiming that they also can't cover it because it's clearly seen a bit of time on track. I argued that the issue has happened before (they repaired it the first time when the car was stock) and there's clearly an underlying issue causing the gearbox to have more problems of the same nature. I've spoken to Toyota GB and they're going to contact me soon. I really don't want to be out of pocket over a broken synchro when I've done nothing to break it myself! 

Absolutely fuming 

Warranty does not cover racing or competitive usage. There's nothing in there about track day usage not being covered. Also TGB did organise a couple of track days for owners. If you had a warranty issue during those do you think they'd be able to deny a claim?

[Captain Duff 79]

In terms of the modifications part of the issue the EU is your friend here (and I say that as someone who voted to leave it!). The 2003 EU 'Block Exception Regulations' are what you need to quote. These were essentially brought in to stop car manufacturers using their main dealer network as an unfair and expensive cartel and forcing owners to use them for servicing and parts, so the regs have forced them to allow cars to be services elsewhere and fitted with non-OEM parts so long as those places and parts are themselves up to standard (so getting a VAT registered independent garage to do your service and oil change doesn't invalidate any warranty, getting your mate to do it might).

And as others have said, they would need to prove that the mods caused the actual problem, so with a gearbox issue a non-OEM exhaust would not be a reason to refuse a warranty claim, but a re-map or turbo etc. could well be.

This is all in addition to the fact that I got my own second cat deleted after-market exhaust supplied and fitted by main dealer RRG Macc (and so I am not expecting any warranty problems!).

As for the track issue, that may be more problematic as I have a feeling that the warranty views 'racing' as improper use of the vehicle that could invalidate the warranty, but I'm not 100% and 'racing' may not be the same as a track session.

[GreenSpring 13]

8 minutes ago, Captain Duff said:

In terms of the modifications part of the issue the EU is your friend here (and I say that as someone who voted to leave it!). The 2003 EU 'Block Exception Regulations' are what you need to quote. These were essentially brought in to stop car manufacturers using their main dealer network as an unfair and expensive cartel and forcing owners to use them for servicing and parts, so the regs have forced them to allow cars to be services elsewhere and fitted with non-OEM parts so long as those places and parts are themselves up to standard (so getting a VAT registered independent garage to do your service and oil change doesn't invalidate any warranty, getting your mate to do it might).

And as others have said, they would need to prove that the mods caused the actual problem, so with a gearbox issue a non-OEM exhaust would not be a reason to refuse a warranty claim, but a re-map or turbo etc. could well be.

This is all in addition to the fact that I got my own second cat deleted after-market exhaust supplied and fitted by main dealer RRG Macc (and so I am not expecting any warranty problems!).

As for the track issue, that may be more problematic as I have a feeling that the warranty views 'racing' as improper use of the vehicle that could invalidate the warranty, but I'm not 100% and 'racing' may not be the same as a track session.

That's some good information, thank you. It has been remapped, and they did check that.. However I had the same issue repaired prior to ANY modifications so that helps my case a little. I've literally been on a 15 minute track session about 2 weeks ago, that's it. I've spoken to Toyota GB and they're investigating for me so we'll see where it goes from here.

 

I appreciate the detailed post.

[Varelco 211]

Is there an option to go to another dealer? The fact they were that quick to dismiss the claim based on a pretty stupid reason of an aftermarket exhaust just confirms the level of service and resistance you are going to get from them. Whilst I have no doubt after some 'to me to you' they will begrudging attempt to resolve your issue, I doubt it will be done easier or with any real interest.

I'd be tempted to wash my hands of them and try your luck somewhere else.

Its a shame it has to be this case, from my experience and all the feedback I read on the forums, customer satisfaction is definitely not Toyota's  top priority, no doubt its all about sales KPIs etc.

[GreenSpring 13]

Another Update:

I contacted Toyota GB and they have got in touch with my dealer and have now agree'd to take apart my gearbox on the condition that I pay for the labour (£900) if they deem the damage due to my modifications/track use. Now I've had 1 track day, for 15 minutes and the issue was present way before that, they don't believe me when I say that but it's the truth! (So much for the customer is always right). I know myself that this issue was through no fault of mine so I booked it in for the 22nd. We'll see what happens...

[NJay 10]

Call me cynical but once the dealership have your gearbox in bits they can say it's down to your track session and expect you to pay up to fix it?

Anyway an independent can do it and Toyota stump up the cost when the independent assessment shows it had nothing to do with your track session?

[GreenSpring 13]

1 minute ago, NJay said:

Call me cynical but once the dealership have your gearbox in bits they can say it's down to your track session and expect you to pay up to fix it?

Anyway an independent can do it and Toyota stump up the cost when the independent assessment shows it had nothing to do with your track session?

That's what I'm worried about I did ask the dealer if I could take it to an independent for warrenty work and they told me no! Luckily the dealer themselves aren't the ones deciding if it's down to track use, they're sending detailed pictures to ToyotaGB apparently. So the same thing would happen with an independent, they'd need to show Toyota that it's not down to track use in order to get the money from them. Still time to change my mind and cancel the booking though.

[NJay 10]

Ok. I thought the dealership was making the assessment. I would ask for a copy of the photos/submission to toyota Gb so you can see what's they are assessing.

[GreenSpring 13]

I'm not quite sure how they're going to tell though! The problem is a damaged 4th gear synchro, surely they'd need to assess the entire assembly to make sure nothing is causing this to happen as it's in for the second time with the same issue!

[gavin_t 184]

Interesting that the gearbox has had problems more then once. Is it the same issue as last time?
Seems strange because on a whole the gearboxes seem fairly reliable.

Would say you should have a good case the only worry would be that as a synchro is a moving part that depends on user input they may have wriggle to play the improper use card...

[GreenSpring 13]

Just now, gavin_t said:

Interesting that the gearbox has had problems more then once. Is it the same issue as last time?
Seems strange because on a whole the gearboxes seem fairly reliable.

Would say you should have a good case the only worry would be that as a synchro is a moving part that depends on user input they may have wriggle to play the improper use card...

This time it's gear 4, last time it was gear 6. Last time the car was completely stock and I'd had it for about 6-7 months, not done a track day or anything. It's a risky move but hopefully they'll honor it under warrenty.

[gavin_t 184]

very strange, would be interesting to know the outcome. If they only repaired the synchro and didn't just replace the box maybe it had a bad batch of internals that weren't properly hardened or something?

You would have to be pretty ham fisted to damage a set of synchros in that short space of time.

[Lauren 2259]

4 hours ago, GreenSpring said:

I'm not quite sure how they're going to tell though! The problem is a damaged 4th gear synchro, surely they'd need to assess the entire assembly to make sure nothing is causing this to happen as it's in for the second time with the same issue!

The problem you have is that worn synchros are user error, so tricky to get it done under warranty though some have managed it. It's wear and tear and down to how you change gear etc. Things like resting your hand on the gear stick, the quality of your inputs when you change gear, how fast you do it (always do it slowly!) all impact on synchro wear. 

[Church 209]

Imho biggest wear factor for synchros is non-rev matching + skipping gears. Or costing in neutral and non rev-matching when putting in gear back. Or other scenarios, when it results to not just "normal" 500-1K rpm difference to even out prior gear engage, but 3+K. Synchros might be not that expensive, but unfortunately cost charged for overhauling gearbox/changing them, is. So not sure if slow gear switch is better, as rpms may fall off too much during such, and if combined with non-rev matching .. with timely fast gearswitch engine rpms often fall off just enough for right speed when upshifting. Resting hand on gear stick IIRC wears down more shift selector forks.

Many drivers don't rev match or even coast in neutral, but they often get by with synchros still lasting long in their generic family cars by early upshifts and rarely flooring for fuel economy reasons/or to drive with slow & steady traffic flow, when rpms one should rev to for gear one switches in are not that far from idle rpms. Cars that get more pushed with enthusiastic/sport driving, may suffer extra wear from non rev-matching as there might be more occasions of bigger rpm difference, especially on downshifts. Mine didn't fail, but i'm sure i did put enough unnecessary wear through several trackdays, when i still hadn't yet started learning rev-matching/throttle blipping on downshifts and such, and just forced gear shift, and sometimes even (ab)used such tranny & clutch shock to break traction/get rear sliding.

[Lauren 2259]

@Church. Exactly that. I had already been heel and toeing, rev matching on downshifts and changing gear slowly for over ten years before I got my car. 120K miles/ 192K Kms later and I've no problems at all. I don't change how I change gear or how I heel and toe whether I'm driving on track, on the road or competing in a sprint, so there is no extra wear whatever I'm doing. Trying to do fast gear changes is what ruins the synchromesh, though typically you see this more on 2nd or 3rd gears due to people doing too many traffic light GP's (launching the car). There is nothing inherently wrong with the synchromesh on these cars, so it can only be wear and tear due to how the gears are changed. It might be why I'm still on my original clutch too! 

 

[Church 209]

In my imagination synchros are functionally close to clutches. Fast gear changes may force them to even out rotational speeds quicker, but should synchros wear be that different with both slow and fast gear engage, if rpm difference (thus rotational energy to bleed) to even out (if rev-matched) as similar? My line of thought goes that just like with clutch, quicker or slower release (if both done smoothly) won't change much it's wear, but high revving and dumping it (like if with high rpm difference with synchros) - will increase due high rpm difference & higher torque of engine at high rpms?

I am driving for 11 years, but several driving technics am starting to learn only now during past two years that i started to track this car. In sense, i admire that you are "doing the right thing" for already so long, but i have to overcome many bad learnt habits and in addition to that learning new stuff at my age takes extra effort & time. Just like original AE86 that was sometimes referred as car that teaches driver, GT86 took up that role for me